>>>>>
>>>>>I am not going to debate this with you any more. On Facebook it has already cost me someone who I thought was a friend.
>>>>
>>>>You're debating the wrong question, Mike. The question is not "How did he get his hands on this rifle?", but "What was going on in his life that he saw this as a reasonable response?"
>>>>
>>>>Look, every weapon I have owned has been legally purchased and legally registered and I would have absolutely no problem with either State or Federal government requiring a yearly (or some stretch of time equal to driver's licenses) registration fee, but if someone wants one bad enough, or quickly enough they will get their hands on one. That he didn't have to travel far to do so is unfortunate. So that question is kinda moot.
>>>>
>>>>The second question though...that takes a little more digging for facts and a lot more thought. Why does the United States wait until something like this happens and then all the media are suddenly talking about 'how this gunman fell through the cracks' of all the societal safety nets and 'something should be done!'
>>>>
>>>>Maybe we, as a society, should quit using the jail/prison system for our mental health system. If all you have is a hammer, every problem does pretty much look like a nail.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe we, as a society, should start insisting that mental health should be covered under most insurance plans AFTER diagnosis. 'Cuz once it's diagnosed, it's a pre-existing condition and good luck getting insurance after that.
>>>
>>>I agree with you 100% on the mental health side of this. We absolutely need to make it easier for those with mental illness to be treated.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Maybe we, as a society, should start re-teaching the 'old fashioned ideas' of common decency, respect for others, and common courtesy. And while we're at it, could we throw in the 'Reasonable Rule"? (What can a reasonable person expect of (fill in blank))
>>>>
>>>
>>>Okay. Does a reasonable person think any individual civilian needs to own weapons that can fire 10's or 100's of shots per second?
>>
>>Understanding that I am the proud owner of a 1911A .45 and an IAI .40, I can see no justification for private ownership of an Assult Weapon. So, to me, this does not pass the 'reasonable' test.
>>
>
>The bushmaster fires at nearly the same rate as the 1911 (I have at least one model 1911a). Obviously you have assault weapons that need to be banned.
>
William

There's a difference between speaking in specifics and speaking in the general. Here, we're speaking in generalities. The question was asked "Does someone need to own a weapon that can fire multiple shots per second", NOT "Does someone need to own a Bushmaster that fires multiple shots per second" . See the difference?


>>>
>>>
>>>>Maybe we can quit punishing the many for the stupidity (and sins) of the few.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe we could start insisting that the names of these perpetrators aren't more important that the people they've killed. Quick now, can anyone who doesn't live in the area tell us the victims' names of Columbine? Virginia Tech? the Batman theater?
>>>
>>>The names of the perpetrators reflect our failures as a society, so it's not surprising that we remember them. (On a more practical note, it's at least partly because there's one or two perpetrators and many more victims. Remembering one is always going to be easier than remembering many.)
>>>
>>>Tamar
>>
>>But how much of the remembrance of the perpetrators feed into the next? "If I do this, my name will be right up there with Kliebold!". Why can't we sweep them under the rug, like we do so many other of our societal failures?